CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 74Digitalization, Law, and RegulationEthics and Social Impacts of AILaw, AI, and Intellectual Property

A European agency for artificial intelligence: Protecting fundamental rights and ethical values

Open access
Stahl, Bernd Carsten, Rodrigues, Rowena, Santiago, Nicole, Macnish, Kevin·2022·Computer Law & Security Review
DOI 10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105661
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Following years of intensive international debate of the ethical and human rights implications of artificial intelligence (AI)-related technologies, there are numerous proposals to legislate and regulate these technologies. One aspect of possible legislative frameworks for AI is the creation of a new regulator or other body with the remit to provide oversight of AI. This article reviews the ethical and human rights challenges as well as proposed mitigation strategies, in order to the discuss how a regulatory body might be designed to address these challenges. It focuses on a particular form that a new body might take, more specifically on a potential European Agency for AI. Based on a multi-step methodology of stakeholder interaction, the article proposes a terms of reference for such an Agency and discusses the characteristics it would need to display to ensure that it could adequately engage with current and future ethical and human rights challenges arising from the development, deployment and use of AI. This proposal is then contrasted with the proposed European Artificial Intelligence Board included in the draft European Regulation on AI (the AI Act).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105661

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • En consultas públicas sobre la regulación europea, los actores empresariales expresaron preocupaciones sobre la IA, apoyaron la regulación y mostraron menos preocupación por las desventajas de la IA que otros actores no estatales; estas diferencias son más pronunciadas en países con sectores comerciales de IA más fuertes.

    “De acuerdo con Tallberg et al. (2024), se realizaron consultas públicas sobre esta regulación europea, en las que los actores empresariales expresaron preocupaciones sobre la IA, apoyando la regulación y mostrando menos preocupación por las desventajas de la IA que otros actores no estatales.Los resultados mostraron que estas diferencias son más pronunciadas en países con sectores comerciales de”

    From Hacia una normativa sobre la inteligencia artificial (IA): consideraciones clave y regulaciones internacionales (2024) · cites this paper as Stahl et al., 2022

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. Tutt, Andrew, "An FDA for Algorithms", Administrative Law Review 69, no. 1, 2017, pp. 83-124, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2747994 ; · DOI
  2. 5 Tutt, op. cit., 2017. 6 Ibid. 7 Tutt, op. cit., 2017. 8 Ibid. 9 Tutt, op. cit., 2017. 10 Rodrigues et al., SHERPA D3.3, op. cit., 2019, p.230. 11 Ibid. 12 Rodrigues et al., SHERPA D3.3, op. cit., 2019, p.230. 13 Ibid. 14 Rodrigues et al., SHERPA D3.3, op. cit., 2019, p.230. 15 Ibid. 16 Rodrigues et al., SHERPA D3.3, op. cit., 2019, p.230. 17 Ibid. 1 Hartzog, Woodrow, "Unfair and Deceptive Robots", Maryland Law Review 74, no. 4, 2 June 2015, p.785.
  3. Rodrigues et al., SHERPA D3.3, op. cit., 2019, p.62. Annex B: Focus Group: New AI regulator: questionnaire The objective of the focus group questionnaire was to gather thoughts on the feasibility of a bespoke new regulator for AI and big data at the EU-level and determine ToR. It was administered using Google Forms in advance of the focus group meeting held on 26 June 2020. The results and discussion fed into this report, particularly the development of the ToR. Nine participants completed the questionnaire and the raw results are presented here. You are: 9 responses references Access Now Policy Team. The Toronto declaration: protecting the right to equality and non-discrimination in machine learning systems; 2018 Toronto: Access No. Retrieved from https://www.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2018/08/ The-Toronto-Declaration _ ENG _ 08-2018.pdf. ACM. Statement on algorithmic transparency and accountability; 2017 .
  4. Berendt B . AI for the Common Good?! Pitfalls, challenges, and ethics pen-testing, Paladyn . J Behav Robot 2019;10(1):44-65 .
  5. Boden MA . Artificial intelligence: a very short introduction. Oxford, United Kingdom: OUP Oxford; 2018 Reprint edition .
  6. Brundage, M., Avin, S., Clark, J., Toner, H., Eckersley, P., Garfinkel, B. et al.. (2018). The malicious use of artificial intelligence: forecasting, prevention, and mitigation, arXiv:1802.07228 [cs] . Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07228 · arXiv
  7. Bynum TW . Flourishing Ethics. Ethics Inf Technol 2006;8(4):157-73 .
  8. Clarke R . Privacy impact assessment: its origins and development. Comput Law Secur Rev 2009;25(2):123-35 .
  9. Clarke R . Principles and business processes for responsible AI. Comput Law Secur Rev 2019;35(4):410-22 .
  10. Clarke R . Regulatory alternatives for AI. Comput Law Secur Rev 2019;35(4):398-409 .
  11. Coeckelbergh M . Technology, narrative and performance in the social theatre. In: Kreps D, editor. Understanding digital events: bergson, whitehead, and the experience of the digital. New York: Routledge; 2019a. p. 13-27 .
  12. Coeckelbergh M. AI for climate: freedom, justice, and other ethical and political challenges. AI Ethics 2020a Retrieved from. doi: 10.1007/s43681-020-00007-2 . · DOI · Paper page
  13. Dignum V . Responsible artificial intelligence: how to develop and use ai in a responsible way. 1st ed. Springer; 2019 2019 edition .
  14. EDPS. Artificial intelligence, robotics, privacy and data protection (Room document for the 38th international conference of data protection and privacy commissioners). Marrakech: EDPS; 2016 Retrieved from https://edps.europa.eu/sites/edp/ files/publication/16-10-19 _ marrakesh _ ai _ paper _ en.pdf. EDPS. EDPS Opinion on the European Commission's White Paper on Artificial Intelligence -A European approach to excellence and trust (Opinion 4/2020) (Opinion No. 4/2020), EDPS; 2020 Retrieved from https://edps.europa.eu/sites/edp/files/ publication/20-06-19 _ opinion _ ai _ white _ paper _ en.pdf. Elsevier. ArtificiaI intelligence: how knowledge is created, transferred, and used -trends in China, Europe, and the United States. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2018 Retrieved from https://www.elsevier.com/?a=827872 .
  15. Erdélyi OJ , Goldsmith J . Regulating artificial intelligence: proposal for a global solution. Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2018. p. 95-101 Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/3278721.3278731 . European Commission. Digital Government Factsheets -2019 | Joinup; 2019 Retrieved January 22, 2021, from https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/ nifo-national-interoperability-framework-observatory/ digital-government-factsheets-2019 . European Commission. White Paper on Artificial Intelligence: a European approach to excellence and trust (White paper No. COM(2020) 65 final), Brussels; 2020a Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/ white-paper-artificial-intelligence-european-approach- excellence-and-trust _ en . European Commission. AI Watch | Knowledge For Policy. European Commission; 2020b Retrieved January 23, 2021, from https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/ai-watch _ en . European Commission. Proposal for a regulation on a European approach for artificial intelligence (No. COM(2021) 206 Final). Brussels: European Commission; 2021a Retrieved from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ proposal-regulation-european-approach-artificial- intelligence . European Commission. Artificial Intelligence January 8. Shaping Europe's Digital Future -European Commission; 2021b Retrieved January 30, 2021, from https: //ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/artificial-intelligence . European Parliament. Civil Law Rules on Robotics -European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (2015/2103(INL)), , Pub. · DOI
  16. Finn RL , Wright D . Privacy, data protection and ethics for civil drone practice: a survey of industry, regulators and civil society organisations. Comput Law Secur Rev 2016;32(4):577-86 .
  17. Griggs D , Stafford-Smith M , Gaffney O , Rockström J , Öhman MC , Shyamsundar P , et al . Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature 2013;495(7441):305-7 .
  18. Hagendorff T. The ethics of AI ethics -an evaluation of guidelines; 2019 arXiv:1903.03425 [cs, stat]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.03425 . · arXiv
  19. Haque A , Milstein A , Fei-Fei L . Illuminating the dark spaces of healthcare with ambient intelligence. Nature 2020;585(7824):193-202 .
  20. House of Lords, H. of L. AI in the UK: ready, willing and able?. London: Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence; 2018 Retrieved from https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ ld201719/ldselect/ldai/100/100.pdf. IEEE. The IEEE Global initiative on ethics of autonomous and intelligent systems; 2017 Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://standards.ieee.org/develop/indconn/ec/ autonomous _ systems.html . International Telecommunication Union. AI for good global summit report 2017. Geneva: International Telecommunication Union; 2017 Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/AI/Documents/Report/ AI _ for _ Good _ Global _ Summit _ Report _ 2017.pdf.
  21. Kuhlmann S , Stegmaier P , Konrad K . The tentative governance of emerging science and technology-a conceptual introduction. Res Policy 2019;48(5):1091-7 .
  22. LaGrandeur K. How safe is our reliance on AI, and should we regulate it? AI Ethics 2020 Retrieved from. doi: 10.1007/s43681-020-00010-7 . · DOI
  23. LeCun Y , Bengio Y , Hinton G . Deep learning. Nature 2015;521(7553):436-44 .
  24. Mantelero A . Regulating big data. The guidelines of the Council of Europe in the context of the European data protection framework. Comput Law Secur Rev 2017;33(5):584-602 .
  25. Marsden C , Meyer T , Brown I . Platform values and democratic elections: how can the law regulate digital disinformation? Comput Law Secur Rev 2020;36 :105373 .
  26. Rességuier A , Rodrigues R . AI ethics should not remain toothless! A call to bring back the teeth of ethics. Big Data Soc 2020;7(2) :2053951720942541 .
  27. Rodrigues R, Panagiotopoulos A, Wright D, Hatzakis T, Laulhé Shaelou S, Grant A, et al. SHERPA Deliverable 3.3 Report on regulatory options (online resource No. Project deliverable). SHERPA project 2020a Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.21253/DMU.11618211.v2 . · DOI
  28. Samoili S, Lopez Cobo M, Gombez Gutierrez E, De Prato G, Martinez-Plumed F, Delipetrev B. AI WATCH. defining artificial intelligence. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2020 Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2760/382730 . · DOI
  29. Shneiderman B . Design lessons from AI's two grand goals: human emulation and useful applications. IEEE Trans Technol Soc 2020;1(2):73-82 .
  30. Smuha, N.A., Ahmed-Rengers, E., Harkens, A., Li, W., MacLaren, J., Piselli, R. et al. (2021). How the EU can achieve legally trustworthy AI: a response to the European Commission's proposal for an artificial intelligence act, Available at SSRN, 13:italic https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract _ id=3899991 /13:italic
  31. Tjoa AM , Tjoa S . The role of ICT to achieve the UN sustainable development goals (SDG). In: Mata FJ, Pont A, editors. ICT for promoting human development and protecting the environment. Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 3-13 .
  32. Topol EJ . High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat. Med. 2019;25(1):44-56 .
  33. Vallor S . Technology and the virtues: a philosophical guide to a future worth wanting. Oxford University Press; 2016 .
  34. van Hoboken J , Fathaigh RÓ. Smartphone platforms as privacy regulators. Comput Law Secur Rev 2021;41 :105557 .
  35. Villaronga EF , Golia AJ . Robots, standards and the law: rivalries between private standards and public policymaking for robot governance. COMPUT Law Secur Rev 2019;35(2):129-44 .
  36. Wagner B . Ethics as an escape from regulation: from ethics-washing to ethics-shopping. In: Bayamlioglu E, Baraliuc I, Janssens LAW, Hildebrandt M, editors. Being profiled: cogitas ergo sum. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press; 2018. p. 84-90 .
  37. Wallach W , Marchant G . Toward the agile and comprehensive international governance of AI and robotics [point of view]. Proc. IEEE 2019;107(3):505-8 .
  38. Walsham G . Are we making a better world with ICTs? Reflections on a future agenda for the IS field. J Inf Technol 2012;27(2):87-93 .
  39. Willcocks L . Robo-Apocalypse cancelled? Reframing the automation and future of work debate. J Inf Technol 2020;35(4):286-302 .
  40. Wolbert LS , Ruyter DJD , Schinkel A . What kind of theory should theory on education for human flourishing be? Br J Educ Stud 2019;67(1):25-39 .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stahl, B. C., Rodrigues, R., Santiago, N., & Macnish, K.
Affiliations
  • De Montfort University (GB)
  • Trilateral Research & Consulting (GB)
Corresponding author
Stahl, Bernd Carsten
ORCID
Venue
Computer Law & Security Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-07
Volume
45
Pages
105661
ISSN
2212-473X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105661
OpenAlex
W4220712745
Cited by
74
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 6
FWCI
101.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Computer law & security review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • European Commission (786641, HORIZON2020, 945539)
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (#945539, 786641)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
Keywords
AI regulation, fundamental rights, AI ethics, human oversight of AI, EU AI Act, terms of reference, stakeholder engagement, AI governance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review